Posted
by
CmdrTaco
on Monday July 26, 2010 @09:13AM
from the oil-already-seeped-into-brain dept.

rollcall writes "The Livingston, Louisiana public school district is considering introducing intelligent design into its science curriculum. During the board's meeting Thursday, several board members expressed an interest in the teaching of creationism. 'Benton said that under provisions of the Science Education Act enacted last year by the Louisiana Legislature, schools can present what she termed "critical thinking and creationism" in science classes. Board Member David Tate quickly responded: "We let them teach evolution to our children, but I think all of us sitting up here on this School Board believe in creationism. Why can't we get someone with religious beliefs to teach creationism?" Fellow board member Clint Mitchell responded, "I agree...you don't have to be afraid to point out some of the fallacies with the theory of evolution. Teachers should have the freedom to look at creationism and find a way to get it into the classroom."'"

Don't be surprised. He suffered some serious head trauma disproving the liberal so-called "universal gravitation" before a quick-thinking doctor introduced him to the theory of intelligent falling just to get him to stop hurting himself....

it is what human beings do when they engage in the genetic engineering of the dna of other creatures (or of homo sapiens)

the way creationists propose that god designed us is something that will be in the realm of the ability of human beings within a century. and if us lowly imperfect human beings have the powers of god, that says one of two things:

You know maybe that's the tact reality based people ought to be taking.

"Dear School board,
I don't want my tax money going to the ACLU and I know you definitely don't want tax money going to the ACLU, therefore, for the sake of fiscal conservatism and the love of all that's good and holy, don't push creationism. We all believe in the his noodley-ness here, but we'd rather take care of teaching our kids in Sunday school than getting slapped down for the hundredth time by those damned liberal activist judges. Let's make a deal. After Sarah Palin appoints Scalia Jr. as justice Breyer's replacement then we'll try again, but in the meantime, but we're just wasting our time and money while the Court is made up of godless commies."

(Never mind, of course, that the courts will shoot this Louisianan idiocy down in a heartbeat.)

On the one hand, we have the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection, a scientific theory backed by a volume of evidence more diverse and massive than that assembled in support of any other theory.

On the other hand...we have a faery tale.

No, really.

Cdesign proponentsists would have us instead accept a “theory” drawn solely on the proposition that the Bible is substantially true.

And the Bible opens with a story — the very one they’d replace science with — about a magic garden with talking animals and an angry giant.

Worse, it continues in exactly that same vein. It prominently features a talking shrubbery (on fire, no less!) that instructs the reluctant hero how to wield his magic wand. It has more talking animals, sea monsters, lots more giants, and an endless string of magic spells. There’s even a dragon in there, and I think there might be a unicorn, too. At the end we have an utterly bizarre zombie fantasy, complete with one of the thralls groping the zombie king’s intestines. And the grand finale? Global zombie apocalypse.

All y’all who dismiss science in favor of fantasy? This is why we laugh at you.

And I’d rather not have my tax dollars spent spreading an athiestic dogma that somehow got passed off as the One True Religion. Sort of like killing a baby was okay if the baby is just a lump of tissue... like having a mole removed or cutting your nails.

Here’s a novel concept. You send YOUR kids to a religious school that caters to YOUR atheistic beliefs. Problem solved.

Any observation anyone makes can simply be explained by "God made it that way." There is no way to refute it with evidence-- it is a belief-based system that depends on supreme being instead of natural processes.

Actually its pretty easy to refute. Just get advocates of different belief systems together and let them logically debate and come to a mutually acceptable solution, like scientists would about any other topic.

I'm sure the "creation science" views of a traditional Roman pagan, a modern Christian, a Native American, and some eastern cyclical religion would probably refute each other quite well.

What you fail to see and what evolutionists seem to want to ignore is that science actually proves creationism. I don't have the space to put it here so do the research yourself and quite ignoring what doesn't fit into your "mold of what you expect to find out".

Since proving creationism necessitates, by definition, proving the existence of a deity, allow me to be the latest of what are doubtless many people to say that you're full of shit and should DIAF before your stupidity infects those around you.